We now have the latest clear cut example of how intellectually corrupted climate science has become. The Marcott "hockey stick" was the latest peer reviewed research that was enthusiastically cited here as yet more proof that it is hotter than ever before in history. It passed peer review to appear in what had over time earned a reputation as a reliable science journal - Science.

Well it appears this Marcott paper is the most crass abomination of science. Without even considering motive or reasons why the ludicrously massive mistakes were made by the authors, cleared or missed by the reviewers and then signed off by the editors, this is a scientific scandal. It is only made worse by the fact that this isn't supposed to be just some intellectual fascination that will expand our knowledge, but something that will help bolster and advance political policy.

Without getting into technicalities which I can't follow, the authors of Marcott et al changed dates on historical data sets without saying they did so and (obviously) without any reason or justification and produced a purported history of global temperatures that had a pronounced hockey stick uptick in modern times - the implication being man caused it. After auditing the analysis through replication it appears that if those dates Had not been manipulated the uptick would not have been found.

This chart illustrates the scale of the problem. The black line replicates results of the analysis as conducted in the paper with dates changed. The red shows results when the dates are not changed.

The political fervour that has captured academia and the peer review network in this field of science has hit rock bottom. Scientists are blinded by their own propensity for confirmation bias that it give the appearance of cognative dissonance.

The peer review system that is supposed to try and safeguard against such failure instead is aiding its spread. This is scandalous beyond belief.

Agnotologist just for interlude purposes. Hiatus is a synonym of pause. For example: there has been a pause / hiatus in global temperatures rises, as recorded in BEST, HadCRUT3, and HadCRUT4 for the last 15 years despite the increase in atmospheric CO2 from 370 to 390 ppm.

Catastrophists have no need to admit or agree with any truths, especially that CO2 doesn't seem to be keeping its end of their bargain.

We now have the latest clear cut example of how intellectually corrupted climate science has become. The Marcott "hockey stick" was the latest peer reviewed research that was enthusiastically cited here as yet more proof that it is hotter than ever before in history. It passed peer review to appear in what had over time earned a reputation as a reliable science journal - Science.

Well it appears this Marcott paper is the most crass abomination of science. Without even considering motive or reasons why the ludicrously massive mistakes were made by the authors, cleared or missed by the reviewers and then signed off by the editors, this is a scientific scandal. It is only made worse by the fact that this isn't supposed to be just some intellectual fascination that will expand our knowledge, but something that will help bolster and advance political policy.

Without getting into technicalities which I can't follow, the authors of Marcott et al changed dates on historical data sets without saying they did so and (obviously) without any reason or justification and produced a purported history of global temperatures that had a pronounced hockey stick uptick in modern times - the implication being man caused it. After auditing the analysis through replication it appears that if those dates Had not been manipulated the uptick would not have been found.

This chart illustrates the scale of the problem. The black line replicates results of the analysis as conducted in the paper with dates changed. The red shows results when the dates are not changed.

The political fervour that has captured academia and the peer review network in this field of science has hit rock bottom. Scientists are blinded by their own propensity for confirmation bias that it give the appearance of cognative dissonance.

The peer review system that is supposed to try and safeguard against such failure instead is aiding its spread. This is scandalous beyond belief.

I find your lather of fake indignation totally unconvincing.

Copied tranches of text from "Climate Audit" (WTF IS A "climate audit"?) cut no ice.

Why the overheated hatred and vilification directed at Marcott? It is only one science paper among many. Marcott is by no means an iconic figure, and his work is one among many papers, and confirmatory of what is already pretty much accepted.

Why are the "Climate Auditors" whipping up hatred on the web against a young scientist, when the correct approach, the one that carries some integrity, is to submit a comment to the journal Science (which is not a specialist climate science journal, and is the one of the most prestigious science journals) and have it reviewed?

I notice the "Auditors" ravings are being large ignored, and rightly so. I also notice that no rejoinder is expected from Marcott ... the hanging will take place straightaway.

PS The goal posts have shifted from yesterday's assaults on Marcott's thesis work. Yawn. These deniers never learn. Obviously the goal is to "get" Marcott and discourage other young climate scientists from engaging in ground-breaking research. The Luddite "Auditors" will not succeed.

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and scientists are more than 90% certain that it is primarily caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases produced by human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.

About Politics.ie

Politics.ie is one of Ireland's leading politics and current affairs discussion websites with more than 600,000 visitors a month. Founded in 2003, Politics.ie has one of the most engaged, respected and influential politics and current affairs communities.